thanks so much for watching this afternoon. chris matthews and "hardball" is next. high noon. let's play "hardball." good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington. let me start with this. remember what you, i mean you, personally, thought when you heard all those first graders had been shot up there in connecticut? first if you're like me, you thought of the little kids and the fear, terror, the horror of those nightmare seconds. the last those kids would ever know. second, you thought of the ferocious firing of bullets. all these bullets flying from one person's hand. all that death coming in that hard barrage. what kind of gun did this guy have? 27 people, 20 little kids, blown to kingdom come in a moment of hideous mass murder. this evening the president is up

in connecticut trying manfully to resurrect that first human parental reaction of ours, caring for those lost, the caring that this kind of mass killing weapon should not be in the hands of a nut, a murderer on a rampage, someone who wanted this very weapon so he could kill like he was in some house of horrors shooting gallery. this soul dedicated to the nightmare. the question, perhaps, the last question about gun safety, not just now, but for the foreseeable future, is whether the president can redeem this once salvageable good from this horror. can he get the congress to show the guts that those teachers showed when they stood up to the mass killer? can he get toomey and coburn and some of the others of the party that prides itself in upholding personal responsibility, to show some of that themselves? can the republicans tell the lost souls of newtown they are here standing with those unforgettable grown-ups who raced down, faced the killer, with nothing to shield them but an ability of heart? because we can use some of that ability. america can. in the days just ahead.

i'm joined by nbc's political director, chief white house correspondent, chuck todd. and ron reagan, msnbc contributor. guys, this is exactly what i'm hoping the president can do. restore the moments when we first, our first powerful impression of the kids and the weapon used to kill them. and can he get that back into the hearts and minds of the politicians? first off, why don't we start with this? people who saw this show haven't forgotten it. last night there was a stark reminder what this current debate about gun legislation is really about. as i said, the families and the victims from the newtown massacre. they told their stories on "60 minutes." many of home' are come to washington this week on air force one to urge congress to vote on gun legislation and they have a powerful message. let's listen to it. >> they need to not just look us in the eyes but look our children and the lost ones and see those faces, see what's gone. >> we don't get to move on. we don't have the benefit of turning the page to another piece of legislation and having

another debate and playing politics the same way we've been doing. we don't have that benefit. we're going to live with this for the rest of our lives, so our legislators need to hear us. >> it's going to happen again. it is going to happen again. and every time, you know, it's somebody else's school. it's somebody else's town. it's somebody else's community. until one day, you wake up and it's not. >> it's not somebody else's. chuck, we cover politics, but i think this is deeper than just the usual, you know, spending bill, or tax bill. this is about the american heart. and whether it's open to the horror that happened. it's not just going back to the usual battle stations and play the game of the nra. >> reporter: well, and it's that last sentence to me that's the most haunting. from david wheeler. that was, who was speaking just then. because you would hate to think that you need another tragedy before something gets done, or, you know, it takes another

moment, you know, and i think that that's what the message, from what i understand it, these newtown families want to send to congress is don't wait for it to happen again and be right back having the same conversation again. this is one that seemed to punk everybo punch everybody in the stomach the same way, because as you brought up, chris, it's little kids. it's hard enough at any school, hard enough at any university. when you realize it's 6 years old, and we all know the wonderment a 6-year-old has. i have a 6-year-old. you can't -- it eats a you in a way you cannot necessarily put into words very well. so i think that's what the president is trying to spark. you know, in december, right after newtown happened, you feel like anything was possible in congress. right now it doesn't look good. you want to look at the strat y straight-up politics of this, it doesn't look good if you want to sit there and count votes. if it's going to be something, this may be the last week. the white house is treating this

week, chris, as make or break. >> i agree with you completely. ron reagan, thank you for joining us. it seems to me that question, usually it's complicated in politics. will toomey, pat toomey of pennsylvania, people like tom coburn down in oklahoma, will they man up and say, damn-it to the nra, i'm going to do something now because of what happened up there? and the other way of putting this, can the president use his rhetorical magic, that sometimes he's had it, obviously, and bring the ralphie eality of wha happened in december into the hearts of minds of politicians? he's going to do it within the hour, apparently. >> these are pretty hard-hearted people and cynical people. it's shocking, and frankly, shameful, this long after newtown, we're talking about loopholes and filibusters and things like that. it's not just those 20 children, though chuck is absolutely right. when you see 20 kindergarteners dead, you think of that, it is crushing to you.

but it's 30,000 people a year, chris. this is exponentially more than any other non-warfare riddled country has. that's nearly a 9/11 every month. month after month. year after year in this country. all we can manage is maybe a semi-universal background check? 90% of the public wants this. what's the matter with our elected representatives, chris? what's the matter with them? >> i hope they're watching. anyway, this weekend connecticut governor dan malloy, a good man, had strong words for the nra's wayne lapierre over his opposition to new gun laws. let's watch the governor. >> wayne reminds me of the clowns at the circus. they get the most attention and that's what he's paid to do. i mean, this guy is so out of whack. it's unbelievable. 92% of the american people want universal background checks. i can't get on a plane, as a governor of the state of connecticut, without somebody running a background check on me. why should you be able to buy a

gun or buy a, you know, armor piercing munitions? it doesn't make any sense. he doesn't make any sense. >> you know, chuck and ron, we have a strong constitution. it's been going on since the 1780s. we're going to hold together as a country, but you know, when you look at countries that fail, it's when their parliamentary people, their politicians in parliament, simply do not respond to the public's will. they just don't respond. whether it's latin america or somewhere else in the world. this nonresponsiveness of people like boehner and mitch mcconnell and these people i've talked about, that just don't care that 90% say they want background checks. what are they going to say to the people when they go out to their town meetings? what are they going to say when they campaign for re-election and their opponent says, why didn't this character listen to us? >> well, that's a very good question. >> chuck first. >> your turn. >> sorry.

>> reporter: that's okay. look, one of the issues here, chris, who shows up at those town meetings that a mitch mcconnell or john boehner goes it. it's going to be folks that are members of the nra. and more strident members of the nra. and that's been sort of part of the i think the miscommunication. the public's in one place, but what some of them, i think some of the republican members of the house, in particular, their constituents that show up to a town hall meeting are telling them something else so they feel as if they're getting that feedback. i have to say, as a pure political analysis, i do not understand what the nra is up to. i think they have watched as -- they were a powerful lobby because they had bipartisan reach. they have now alienated a big chunk of the democratic party in congress and in washington and i think they're going to live to regret this down the road. maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but someday when democrats control the house again, and they're wondering how come they don't have allies anymore, the first time

democrats took over the house in this decade, gun laws weren't touched. why? because the nra had a reach into the democratic party. but the way they've handled themselves post-newtown, particularly mr. lapierre has been a pr disaster for the nra. i think they're going to wish they had done this over again. they seem to be more worried about larry pratt and the gun owners of america outflanking them than they are about actually still controlling a good chunk of washington. i think they've really politically, looking at pure politics of it, blown it. >> here's how it stands politically right now. 13 republican u.s. senators taking a hardline when it comes to gun legislation. they're threatening to filibuster. take a look. they include rand paul, mike lee, ted cruz, marco rubio. all those other senators, those senators sent a letter to harry reid saying in part, "we will oppose the motion to proceed on any legislation that will serve as a vehicle for any additional gun restrictions." this weekend senator john mccain was asked what he thought about that prospect of a filibuster. in other words, the push by these 13 guys to prevent any

vote, even a meaningful debate, on gun control. let's watch. >> i don't understand it. the purpose of the united states senate is to debate and to vote and to let the people know where we stand. >> so you'd encourage republicans not to filibuster? >> i would not only encourage it, i don't understand it. what are we afraid of? >> you know, that's the good john mccain, ron. there he is saying, let's have a debate. if the whole country's talking about gun safety, pro and con, nra included, gun owners of america included, gun safety people, the 90%, how can they say we're not going to let the people vote on this because we're afraid if they do go to vote, then a lot of suburban voters will tell their senators vote for the background check. at least do that. >> yeah. exactly. they don't want to vote because they know that they'll lose. at least on background checks. probably won't get an assault weapons ban through, but background checks, that's a pretty -- that's a no-brainer there. but so they can't let that happen. let's not pretend this is an

ideological thing for most of these people. you know, the nra, the gun sellers of america, whatever you want to call them, this is about money for them. they don't care that 90% of the public wants one thing, universal background checks. they're looking at their strategy and so far it's been working. the more frightened they make a smaller and smaller group of people that their guns are going to be taken away, the more guns those people will buy. and, you know, at this point only about 35% of the country owns guns, but they own more and more and more guns. they're stockpiling weapons and they've built a multibillion dollar industry. >> let me go back to the moment we're in right now. and chuck, size it up. you're about to -- before we're going to have the president on here as soon as he makes his speech tonight. it could come at the end of the hour or a little bit late. here's the question. what's obama going to say to those people up there that's going to break through the barrier of the right wing and the nra to stop even a vote this week or next? >> reporter: i think the best thing he has going for him is

the fact that there's a fight to just simply prevent a vote. and that was, you know, what was the most effective retor rhetor line we've heard the president say in his state of the union? when he went through at the end of the speech and invoked the memories of gabby giffords, evoked the memories of folks in aurora, evoked the memories of the folks in connecticut and said they deserve a vote. i think in many ways his political opponents here have given him an easy opening. he's not asking even to pass something. he just wants a vote on something. that makes it an easier -- if you're looking at raw politics, that's an easy victory for him. >> that's the way i'd do it. i hope it works tonight. we'll be covering it when it happens. chuck todd, thank you from connecticut. ron reagan joining us again. coming up, guns aren't the only issue coming to a head at the president's desk right now. there's immigration and the budget fight. how these three turn out will have a lot to say about this president's legacy in history. how does the president work with

republicans who demand he be more involved and vote against it because he's more involved? also, when did the reflux response from the right, anything the president wants to do, obama care, higher taxes on the wealthy, gun restrictions, become that's an assault on my freedom? could it be because they're losing the argument and have nothing else to say? and the passing of margaret thatcher at the age of 87 prompted reflections on her legacy. one of her most notable and least talked about achievements was bringing american-style to british politics. by the way, the keyword there might be daughter. the first woman to lead a western power in our current times. finally, conspiracy theorists unite. vice president biden mentions the word, actually the words, "new world order." some on the right conclude the crazy interpretation. we're on our way to one world government. boy, they're easily spooked. this is "hardball," the place for politics. ressive? a talking car. but i'll tell you what impresses me.

a talking train. this ge locomotive can tell you exactly where it is, what it's carrying, while using less fuel. delivering whatever the world needs, when it needs it. ♪ after all, what's the point of talking if you don't have something important to say? ♪

well, you can add another senator to that growing list of marriage equality supportsers. south dakota's tim johnson says he backs same-sex marriage. that brings the total number of u.s. senators endorsing gay marriage to 54. that's out of 100. senator johnson announced last month he won't run for re-election in an increasingly red south dakota when his current term ends after next year. and we'll be right back. i'm the world's worst cleaning lady. i'm here in your home, having a pretty spectacular tuesday. ♪ but i don't notice the loose rug at the top of your stairs.

and that's about to become an issue for me. ♪ and if you got the wrong home insurance coverage, my medical bills could get expensive. so get allstate. [ dennis ] good hands. good home. make sure you have the right home protection.

welcome back to "hardball." as i said, we're about to enter a hugely important period for president obama and the country. congress is returning from its spring break. the next few weeks in this city could determine, well, among other things the president's legacy in this country. will he be remembered for passing gun control legislation with background checks for gun buyers? will history show him signing comprehensive immigration reform at some point? will he and congressional republicans work out some kind of grand bargain, call it what you want, that combines tax reform, that raises revenues, with entitlement cuts and reforms? the president's at a critical juncture. the question tonight for the

republic republicans, are they willing to work with him at all? how does he get them on board without scaring away democrats in the process? we have our "hardball" strategists to advise their camps. they're not going to squabble, they're going to advise. mcmahon, you're so smart. you're in the corner with the president. he invites you in. i have three big issues on the table. gun control looks very dicey now. >> right. >> immigration is a must-win. which of those three should he get out front on and say this is the obama bill? i'm putting my face out in front? which should he fight for or lead from behind as they say? >> well, actually right now he's already made that decision. he's out front. he's in connecticut tonight talking about the importance of gun control. and reasonable restrictions that most americans agree with. so he's there. i think there's one thing you left off, chris, which is his legacy, ultimately, is going to be health care reform and budget-related. he has to make sure health care reform works which means finding a way to get it implemented so people understand the value in

their lives. i think he's in a very good position coming out on this budget conversation, bring a budget forward -- >> because he put his cards on the table. >> he looks perfectly reasonable. in the immigration debate, the president is looking reasonable. >> he's leading from behind. >> he's leading from behind only because he wants the senate to act first. but he will lead on this if that's what it takes. >> let me ask you the last question to you then i'll go to john. people tell me, i mean, i know this, this is what i think about all the time. they hate him so much on the republican right that if he puts his face on any bill, it's called the obama immigration bill, it doesn't pass the republican house and therefore he gets nothing in history. >> there are a couple things going on here. the first is the president wins -- >> i mean by getting stuff done. in the end you're judged by what you get done. >> he's gotten a number of things done he has to make sure work. the republican, by the way, are going into 2014 with a brand problem. people think they don't get it. they think they're out of touch. >> nice try. >> he can take the house. >> okay. let me go back to you on this question. should the republicans beat him

on everything? do they actually win if we get no gun safety? the republicans win if we get no immigration reform or no deal on the budget. do they win with three losses for the country? >> i don't think so. your question is a good one. here's how i look at it. on gun control, it's easy for the republicans to oppose obama. it's not so easy for republicans to oppose the parents. so i think on gun control, h he has to step back and let the parents of those kids, and i feel for those parents so desperately, that that's how you get -- >> would you give a vote on the senate? would you let the senate vote on background checks? >> i think if harry reid wants a vote, they're going to get a vote. i think they will get a vote on background checks. i think it was unwise to go for assault weapons. >> are they going to get 60 votes to break the filibuster? >> pat toomey wants to get something done. something modest that doesn't scare people. >> i'm watching toomey. >> i know you are. >> because i think we've been talking to our producers, it's really tricky where he stands. is he going to back gun safety in a state that's pro-gun like pennsylvania or not? >> i think they're going to

ultimately get some sort of modest deal on gun safety. let me say, the rest of your question. on the budget i think he needs to leads on entitlement reform. >> he's done it. >> that's the start of the process. he's got to keep -- >> what about your side? should your guys give on revenues? >> taxes just went up. >> for the rich. 1%. >> it hurt economic growth. i think you need -- >> you keep pulling this number. i said no rhetoric tonight. you keep saying taxes are going up on the top 1%. >> i think ultimately if he leads enough on entitlement reform he could get some revenue. >> would you go with him if you're a republican leader? say, okay, you've done a good thing on reform? >> if he goes all in on entitlement reform, they can get -- >> that monkey on their back. >> on immigration this has to be a true cooperation. figure out a way to get marco rubio and ted cruz to get together. ultimately you have to get 70 votes out of the senate to get enough momentum to get it

through the house. >> does the president want the issue of immigration going into the 2014 election or want a bill by then or rather have, get the house back in democratic hands in '14? >> if he doesn't get the bill, he wants to embarrass the republicans, push them too far. >> let's get the issue that's really changed in our lifetime. gay marriage. as i mentioned a bit earlier, south dakota democratic senator tim johnson became the 54th senator to endorse same-sex marriage today. let's look back and take a look. less than a year ago in may 2012 joe biden publicly supported same-sex marriage on "meet the press." he was way out front. prompting the president to do the same just a few days later. then nevada senator, democratic leader harry reid the next day said he, too, thought gays should be able to marry legally. fast towaforward to the last mo. we've seen an incredible swell of support. starting with rob portman in mid-march. citing his gay son the reason to re-evaluate his position. hillary clinton three days later

taped a video for the human rights campaign endorsing same-sex marriage. then came senators mccaskill, rockefeller, testor, hagan, casey, carper, kirk, bill nelson, heidkamp, donnelly and today tim johnson. three have not backed it. louisiana's mary landrieu, arkansas's mark pryor and manchin. why does it seem to happen day after day after day? is it a big plus for democrats? >> it's a big plus for democrats. republicans have explaining to do because it's the party of limited government. it's the party of get government out of our life and it's also, in this case, the party of hypocrisy. because they seem to be -- >> that's what you would say if you're a democrat. yeah. go ahead. >> does your party have a problem -- the hill has plenty of gay staffers, gay republicans. there are a lot of gay republicans around. how do they stand in this position? the active people? >> i think the most interesting

thing that's happened when rob portman made his decision to come out in favor of gay marriage, all these democrats immediately said, i'm with rob portman. >> what do you think that was about? >> they were worried about their constituencies back home. i think for rob portman -- >> he's the leader? >> i think he in many ways changed a lot of minds for the democrats. it's been fascinating. there are three democrats. >> do you have to be a -- does your kid have to be gay for you to come out for gay marriage if you're republican? >> apparently. >> this is all politics is local. let's get back to the election. you guys have to write a party platform in 2016. will it, again, be anti-gay? >> i have no idea. >> when are they going to stop doing it? >> the people who write the platform are not necessarily the people who vote. that's a small group and they -- >> you are running the platform. >> they run the platform. >> this is like the cafeteria catholic. he ignores anything on the platform he doesn't like. >> the republicans have been ignoring their platform for years. >> suppose you're giving the republican convention access

tans speech. chris christie, rand paul, whoever gets the nomination next time. rubio probably. who knows. will you make a case against gay marriage in that speech? would you hold the line? >> completely in that convention speech is economic growth. i wouldn't even talk about gay marriage. i think bashing ga wherys is a political loser. >> would you come out for same-sex marriage if you're the candidate next time? >> i might depending on how i feel. >> this is like situation ethics. i might depending how i feel. >> i don't think it's going to be that big of a political issue. >> advisers, guys like him won't tell him to do it? >> i don't think it's going to be that big -- >> what will ed rowlands tell you to do if you're the candidate? >> what did he tell michele bachma bachmann? >> sarcastic. i think you guys are going to do just like you said, tuck it. hide that baby. thank you, steve mcmahon. and john feehrey. up next, joe biden

inadvertently fuels the right wing conspiracy nuts. that's their phrase for black helicopters. and this is "hardball." the place for politics. hey. whassup. guten tag. greetings earthlings. what's crackalackin? it's great we express ourselves differently. if we were all the same, life would be boring. so get to know people who aren't like you. you'll appreciate what makes us different. the more you know.

thto fight chronic. osteoarthritis pain. to fight chronic low back pain. to take action. to take the next step. today, you will know you did something for your pain. cymbalta can help. cymbalta is a pain reliever fda-approved to manage chronic musculoskeletal pain. one non-narcotic pill a day, every day, can help reduce this pain. tell your doctor right away if your mood worsens, you have unusual changes in mood or behavior or thoughts of suicide. anti-depressants can increase these in children, teens, and young adults. cymbalta is not for children under 18. people taking maois, linezolid or thioridazine or with uncontrolled glaucoma should not take cymbalta. taking it with nsaid pain relievers, aspirin, or blood thinners may increase bleeding risk. severe liver problems, some fatal, were reported. signs include abdominal pain and yellowing skin or eyes. tell your doctor about all your medicines, including those for migraine and while on cymbalta, call right away if you have

high fever, confusion and stiff muscles or serious allergic skin reactions like blisters, peeling rash, hives, or mouth sores to address possible life-threatening conditions. talk about your alcohol use, liver disease and before you reduce or stop cymbalta. dizziness or fainting may occur upon standing. take the next step. talk to your doctor. cymbalta can help. [ male announcer ] how could a luminous protein in jellyfish, impact life expectancy in the u.s., real estate in hong kong, and the optics industry in germany? at t. rowe price, we understand the connections of a complex, global economy. it's just one reason over 75% of our mutual funds beat their 10-year lipper average. t. rowe price. invest with confidence. request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment information, risks, fees and expenses to read and consider carefully before investing.

ha! back to "hardball." now to the sideshow. first, vice president joe biden unintentionally provides cat nip for the world of conspiracy. biden was talking about trade laws at a banking conference this friday. here's line that kicked off the storm. >> the affirmative task we have now is to actually create a new world order. because the global order is changing again. >> so biden said new world order, meaning that the international community needs to revamp trade laws to reflect the times. but in far right conspiracy world, out there, new world order is a secret plot where

individual nations are absorbed by a single world government. you may remember alex jones' tirade at piers morgan last year suggested the government, our government was out to confiscate all our guns. on biden's nod to a new world order he said, "vice president joe biden threw caution to the wind friday as he shockingly declared the affirmative task we have now is to actually create a new world order adding yet another admission to an already long list of documented globalist bragging of plans for a centralized one world global government." to jones and his cohorts, any cooperation among governments and multinational banks is evidence that this one world government is in the works. also, what can brown do for you? congressman paul brown, that is, the georgia republican who said evolution and the big bang theory for, "lies straight from the pit of hell." brown carved out time at a recent town hall meeting to rally against obama care, specifically a recently withdrawn proposal that would have provided coverage for sex change operations. why his operation -- why his

opposition? brown put it like this. "i don't want to pay for a sex change operation. i'm not interested in. i like being a boy." in other words, why should i pay for something if i personally don't directly benefit? by the way, if brown's logic, if you can call it that, sounds familiar, think back to what senator saxby chambliss said about his opposition to gay marriage last month. "i'm not gay, so i'm not going to marry one." hmm. next we turn to my overseas look-alike. london mayor boris johnson. no, they didn't get the right picture. we really do look alike in other pictures. johnson is no stranger to silly situations like getting stuck on a zip line during a ceremony at the london olympics. earlier today boris johnson channeled michael jordan. you won't believe this shot.

a lot of action in that basket. anyway, see what i mean? if that looked effortless to you, there's a reason. according to the mayor, anyway. >> very clear, i was saving that up. i could have done it any time. >> anyway, always had it up his sleeve. president obama hasn't been lucky of late going 2 for 22 when he hit court at the white house eager egg roll last week. up next, remembering margaret thatcher who broke down class and, of course, gender barriers to become britain's first female prime minister and a great one at that. and that's ahead. you're watching "hardball," the place for politics. humans. even when we cross our t's and dot our i's, we still run into problems. namely, other humans. which is why at liberty mutual insurance, auto policies come with new car replacement and accident forgiveness if you qualify. see what else comes standard

at libertymutual.com. liberty mutual insurance. responsibility. what's your policy? mr. wiggles and curling irons. for the little mishaps you feel, use neosporin to help you heal. it kills germs so you heal four days faster neosporin. also try neosporin eczema essentials. governor of getting it done. you know how to dance... with a deadline. and you...rent from national. because only national lets you choose any car in the aisle... and go. you can even take a full-size or above, and still pay the mid-size price.

this is awesome. [ male announcer ] yes, it is, business pro. yes, it is. go national. go like a pro.

and his new boss told him two things -- cook what you love, and save your money. joe doesn't know it yet, but he'll work his way up from busser to waiter to chef before opening a restaurant specializing in fish and game from the great northwest. he'll start investing early, he'll find some good people to help guide him, and he'll set money aside from his first day of work to his last, which isn't rocket science. it's just common sense. from td ameritrade. i'm jon fortt with your cnbc market wrap. stocks turn positive.

the dow ends up 48. the s&p adds 9. and the nasdaq gains 18. aluminum giant alcoa kicked off the start of the earnings season. it posted a profit of 11 cents a share, better than expected but revenue fell short. ge is making a big purchase. it's buying oil field services firm lufkin industries for $3.3 billion. and jcpenney shares are volatile after hours after the company ousted its ceo. that's it from cnbc, first in business worldwide. now back to "hardball." welcome back to "hardball." as we reported earlier in the show, former british prime minister margaret thatcher passed away at the age of 87. her 11 years and half as british prime minister were historic. he was the first woman to lead the uk and the first woman really to lead a western power

in mod earn history. i guess you have to go back to elizabeth i to see an earlier version of leadership in the world. today british prime minister david cameron spoke of her influence. >> we've lost a great prime minister, a great leader, a great britain. as our first woman prime minister, margaret thatcher succeeded against all the odds and the real thing about margaret thatcher is that she didn't just lead our country, she saved our country. >> joining me right now is the great historian, doug brinkley. and andrea mitchell. the host of "andrea mitchell reports" on this network. we knew it was coming. she had dementidementia. she had alzheimer's all those years. i think she's probably the greatest prime minister of britain besides churchill. >> there were many domestic issues in the uk where she was derided and hated. she was tough on immigrants. there were riots in the streets. but she had such character and

grit. she was consistent. she was, like her friend, ronald reagan, consistent in her beliefs. and she was so tough. she loved the combat. she loved question time. she was perfect for the time and the place. and in war and peace, she was, you know, not just a cold warrior, because she was the first, as we all know, to recognize the potential in mickhail gorbachev. i talked to jim baker today. he said they had a seamless relationship. only one dispute over grenada. his invasion. >> he never called her. >> he called her the night before. and she said, ronnie, that is not consultation, that is notification. >> he did the same thing to tip o'neill, by the way, that night. anyway. let me go to doug. it seems to any a key to a leader is understanding your culture, your nationalism. her sense of british nationalism was very close to reagan's. it was very nationalistic. her sense of how to connect with her people. we love britain, we want her

back. >> well, that's right. i mean, she waived the union just like ronald reagan waved the american flag. at the time she arrived in 1979, there was a fatigue, exhaustion, in the '60s and '70s. britain didn't know what they were doing. dean atchison said at west point in 1962, britain had lost an empire and hadn't found a role for itself. by the time thatcher came in, she was able to get them to be proud of being britain's again. i think it was the seminal turning point. also for a woman to be overseeing a military exercise like that had a big impact. >> i'm thinking of elizabeth i, the great queen who fought the armada. i think of her. i think hillary is probably going to run. i don't know whether she will. she'll probably run. who will her role model be? here's the question. thatcher ran very much as sort of a classic male politician.

i'm the leader, i have the truth, listen to me and follow me. i don't want a meeting on it. >> colin powell told me today they were afraid of her handbag. >> oh, yeah, she always carried that. >> she was very feminine in a funny way. >> i met her. >> a very sympathetic character personally. wro if you sat down to interview h her, i remember interviewing her at the height of the controversy over intermediate nuclear missile deployments in europe. and she stood by reagan on that. she stood by him on strategic defense which was derided at "star wars." when you questioned her about that, she absolutely came down on you. >> you made a good case this morning on the fact we are using strategic defense. >> everywhere. >> certainly point defense in israel and our west coast. we're thinking a lot about the north koreans about this. let me tgo back to the woman role. these are great leaders in history. and yet they are rare. and my question --

>> angela amerimerkel. >> merkel, of course. i met her briefly one time before she went on to speak to the house of representatives, to the congress. she was very nice. i walked in the room thinking here's the iron lady, i better be careful. she's the nicest person in the world. so is dennis, her husband. that's still the problem, challenge for women. how can you be tough and a leader? the same time not tick off some guys out there which is always the challenge? doug? you're a guy. you got to answer this. >> well, so her name was, you know, margaret roberts was her maiden name. unlike hillary clinton or eleanor roosevelt, it wasn't a husband who promoted her. she was working class. lived above a grocery store. really made her own way into things. and even the iron lady, i mean, originally the task network and the soviet union used it as a criticism of her and mocked her. she embraced that iron lady motif. yet she always had the learned

manners of the british aristocracy. reagan would always let her walk in front as a proper lady. and that word, lady, she took very seriously, yet she was a hawk on the cold war and was suspicious of the european integration movement, particularly the euro, was more about the special alliance. i think -- with the u.s. i think there is, like you said, chris, churchill and fdr, and then there's thatcher and reagan. she embodies what the special relationship's all about. >> the great thing about churchill, and i'm a churchill buff, or nut even, was he knew he had to fight the nazis. there was no talking to these guys. they had to be beaten. i watched "winds of war" the other night again. the guy says the only thing i want to know about the germans is to lick them. they always knew it came down to talks. you had to negotiate. they weren't crazy, these communists. you could deal with them on self-interest and get somewhere. they both ended up getting somewhere with gorbachev. >> which was not easily forec t

forecastable. she said, i can go business with him, i like gorbachev. reagan had not met with any soviet leader because he said, well, they keep dying on me. now this young man, gorbachev, she sized him up and said we can do business with him. as you remember, that first summit was tough but it led to a lot of other things. >> geneva was very important. you were there i'm sure. thank you, doug brinkley. thank you, andrea mitchell, my colleague. up next, ever notice how any time republicans don't like something president obama wants to do, they call it an assault on freedom? their latest scare tactic, that certainly is. we're going to talk about whether it's working or not. doesn't seem to be. this is "hardball," the place for politics. [ male announcer ] there are only so many foods

that make kids happy. and even fewer that make moms happy too. with wholesome noodles and bite sized chicken, nothing brings you together like chicken noodle soup from campbell's. it's amazing what soup can do. arrival. with hertz gold plus rewards, you skip the counters, the lines, and the paperwork. zap.

it's our fastest and easiest way to get you into your car. it's just another way you'll be traveling at the speed of hertz. let's go right now to the university of hartford and the president. >> hello, connecticut. thank you. well, thank you so much, everybody. let me begin by thanking nicole, for your brave words. [ applause ]

i want to thank them and all the newtown families who've come here today including your first selectman pat lodra. nobody could be -- nobody could be more eloquent than nicole and the other families on this issue. and we are so grateful for their courage and willingness to share their stories again and again, understanding that nothing's going to be more important in making sure the congress moves forward this week than hearing from them. i want to thank all the educators from sandy hook elementary who've come here as well. [ applause ]

the survivors. i love you back. i do. the survivors who still mourn and grieve, but are still going to work every day, to love and raise those precious children in their care as fiercely as ever. i want to thank governor malloy for his leadership. very proud of him. i want to thank the university of hartford for hosting us this afternoon. thank you, hawks. and i want to thank the people of connecticut for everything you've done to honor the memories of the victims. as you're part of their family

as well. one of your recent alumni, rachel devino, was a behavioral therapist at sandy hook. two alumni of your performing arts school, jimmy green and nelba marquez-green, lost their daughter, anna, an incredible vibrant young girl who looked up to them and learned from them and inherited their talents by singing before she could talk. so every family in this state was shaken by the tragedy of that morning. every family in this country was shaken. we hugged our kids more tightly. we asked what could we do as a society to help prevent a tragedy like that from happening again? and as a society we decided that we have to change. we must. we must change. [ applause ]

i noticed that nicole and others refer to that day as 12/14. for these families, it was a day that changed everything. and i know many of you in newtown wondered if the rest of us would live up to the promise we made in those dark days. if we'd change, too, or if once the television trucks left, once the candles flickered out, once the teddy bears were gathered up together, that the country would somehow move on to other things. over the weekend, i heard francine wheeler, who lost her son, ben, that day, say that the four months since the tragedy might feel like a brief moment for some, but for her, it feels like it's been years since she saw ben. and she's determined not to let

what happened that day just fade away. we're not going anywhere, she said. we are here. we are going to be here. and i know that she speaks for everybody in newtown. everybody who is impacted. and newtown, we want you to know that we're here with you. we will not walk away from the promises we've made. we are as determined as ever to do what must be done. in fact, i'm here to ask you to help me show that we we can get done. we're not forgetting. [ applause ] we can't forget. your family is still grieving in ways that most of us can't

comprehend. but so many of you have used that grief to make a difference. not just to honor your own children but to protect the lives of our children. so many of you have mobilized and organized and petitioned you're elected officials, as citizens determined to right something done wrong and last week here in connecticut your ee equity willed leaders responded. the connecticut legislature responded and passed new measures to protect more of our communities from gun violence and governor malloy signed that legislation into law. [ applause ]

so i want to be clear, you, the families of newtown, people across connecticut, you helped to make that happen. your voices, your determination made that happen. obviously the elected leaders did an extraordinary job moving it forward but it couldn't have happened if they weren't hearing from people in their respective districts, people all across the state. that's the power of your voice. and by the way, connecticut's not alone. in the past few months, new york, colorado, maryland have all passed new commonsense gun safety reforms as well. [ applause ] these are all states that share an awful family with gun violence, whether it's the horror of mass killings or

street crime that's too common in too many neighborhoods. they also share hunting and gun ownership. it's been a fabric of people's lives for generations. and everyone included, yes, we can protect more of our citizens from gun violence while still protecting our second amendment rights. those two things don't contradict each other. we can pass commonsense laws that protect our kids and protect our rights. so connecticut's shown the way. and you now is the time for congress to do the same. now's the time for congress to do the same this week. it's a time for congress to do the same.

[ applause ] now, back in january, just a few months after the tragedy in newtown, i announced a series of actions of gun violence and keep our kids' safe. and i've put forth commonsense proposals, much like passed here in connecticut for congress to consider. and you'll remember in my state of the union address, i urged congress to give those proposals a vote. that moment is now. as soon as this week, congress will begin debating these commonsense proposals to reduce gun violence. your senators, dick blumenthal

and chris murray are here. your representatives, john larson, elizabeth este, jim hines, joe courtney, they are all pushing to pass this legislation. but much of congress is only going to act if they hear from you, the american people. so here is what we have to do. i appreciate that. here is what we've got to do. we have to tell congress it's time to require a background check for anyone who wants to buy a gun so that people are a dangerous to themselves and others cannot get their hands on

a gun. let's make that happen. we have to tell congress it's time to crack down on gun trafficking so that folks will think twice before buying a gun as part of a scheme to arm someone who won't pass a background check. let's get that done. [ applause ] we have to tell congress it's time to restore the ban on military-style assault weapons and a ten-round limit for magazines to make it harder for a gunman to fire 154 bullets into his victims in less than five minutes. let's put that to a vote.

the we have to tell congress it's time to strengthen school safety and help people struggling with mental health problems get the treatment they need before it's too late. let's do that for our kids and for our communities. [ applause ] now, i know that some of these proposals inspire more debate than others, but each of them has the support of the majority of the american people. all of them are commonsense. all of them deserve a vote. all of them deserve a vote. consider background checks.

over the past 20 years, background checks have kept more than two million dangerous people from getting their hands on a gun. now, a group of police officers in colorado told me last week that, thanks to background checks, they've been able to stop convicted murderers, from buying a gun. in some case they've actually arrested the person as they were coming to purchase the gun. so we know that background checks can work. but the problem is, loopholes in the current law let so many people avoid background checks altogether. that's not safe. it doesn't make sense. if you're a law-abiding citizen and you go through a background check to buy a gun, wouldn't you expect other people to play by the same rules?

if you're a law-abiding gun seller, wouldn't you want to know you're not selling your gun to someone who's likely to commit a crime? [ applause ] >> shouldn't we make it harder, not easier, for somebody who's convicted of domestic abuse to get his hands on a gun? [ applause ] it turns out 90% of the americans think so. 90% of americans support universal background checks. think about that. how often do 90% of americans agree on anything? and yet 90% are this. republicans, democrats, folks who own guns, folks who don't own guns, 80% of republicans,